LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. \ 

Shelf u^l-&»~~ 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 



A FEW REMARKS ON THE EMENDATION, 

"WHO SMOTHERS HER WITH PAINTING," 

IN THE PLAY OF CYMBELINE. 



Discovered by Mr. COLLIER, in a Corrected Copy 
of the Second Edition of Shakespeare. 



BY 

J. 0. HALLIWELL, ESQ., F.B.S. 8fc. 




LONDON. 

JOHN RUSSELL SMITH, 

36, SOHO SQUARE. 

MDCCCLII. 






LONDON : 

PRINTED BY 

E. Tucker, Frith Street, Soho. 



A FEW REMARKS, Ac." 



There are, perhaps, few subjects requiring greater 
caution in their consideration than conjectural criti- 
cisms on the texts of our early poets. The English 
language and its idioms have so imperceptibly altered 
during the last three centuries — that whilst the casual 
observer might imagine the language of Elizabeth's 
time was almost identical with that spoken at the 
present day — even the student of our literature, unless 
he has paid special attention to that particular section 
of English philology which may be termed, for want 
of a more expressive term, the language of idiom, will 
be inclined to measure the phraseology of the sixteenth 
and seventeenth centuries by the standard of that 
now in common use, and so be involved in errors 
which, arising from a defective system, will of course 
be almost innumerable. 

The first collective edition of Shakespeare's works 
appeared in 1623, seven years after the poet's death, 
and many of the plays contained in that work were 
undoubtedly printed from very authentic manuscripts, 



probably, in many cases, from the author's own auto- 
graph. This noble collection was republished in nine 
years, the second edition appearing in 1632, with 
many corrections of the press, but with other varia- 
tions in idiomatic passages, which, so far from being 
of any authority, prove that the editor of the second 
folio, whoever he was, altered the original text without 
the slightest reference to proper authority, in many 
cases adapting the idiom to the changes which had 
been made in English phraseology during even that 
brief period. Subsequent editors made further altera- 
tions, of course unauthorised by the original manu- 
scripts, which probably perished soon after the 
production of the printed edition of 1623. 

The nearer, therefore, we approach the fountain- 
head, in respect of antiquity, the more likely will be 
the probability of obtaining correct emendations of 
Shakespeare's text. A person living in 1623, with 
the first folio, just published, before him, even pre- 
suming him to have been only conversant with the col- 
loquial phraseology of the age, and not having had the 
opportunity of witnessing the plays in representation, 
would certainly be more capable of correcting any 
palpable errors, than one who followed at a long 
interval, although the latter may have had superior 
advantages in other respects. And so on. As far, 
indeed, as one can judge on a question, where the 
means of comparison must necessarily be defective 
from the deficiency of material, it must be admitted 



that a corrector of Shakespeare's text in 1623* would 
be of more authority than one commencing in 1632, 
and that the latter would, in his turn, be of more 
authority than Rowe or Theobald. This must never- 
theless be stated with some reservation, and with 
special reference to the progress of the changes in 
English idiom ; for I believe it to admit of proof that 
the English language underwent greater changes be- 
tween 1600 and 1630 in that respect than have since 
taken place, even were we to include the two centu- 
ries and upwards which have now elapsed. In fact, 
for the last century and a half, however particular 
words may have varied in the degree of favour 
bestowed upon them, and although many new ones 
have been created, it may fairly be questioned whether 
the idiom of the language has undergone any sensible 
variation, certainly no important change, during that 
period. 

We are in this position respecting our critical know- 
ledge of the writings of Shakespeare. During the 
poet's lifetime, a portion of his plays and poems ap- 
peared in print, some being authentic copies, others 
palpably unauthorised by the author, and certainly 
forming a very inefficient collection of the works of the 
" greatest name in all literature." This deficiency was 
supplied, in some respects in a very admirable man- 
ner, by the collective edition to which we have just 
referred ; but, to whatever cause we may attribute it, 
there undoubtedly remain many errors of importance 



6 

which must be corrected before we can possess a text 
of Shakespeare in the state in which it left the hands 
of the writer, unblotted in a single line, as we are 
informed by Ben Jonson, in his truly noble testimony 
to the intellectual and moral worth of our great 
dramatist. From what sources and by what authority 
shall these errors be rejected, and their places supplied 
by the pure words of Shakespeare ? Alas ! we have 
not even the resources accessible to the editors of the 
ancient writers of Greece and Rome. With one ex- 
ception, which is more curious than valuable in a 
literary point of view, we have no contemporary 
manuscripts, no copies of the early quartos corrected 
by the author, and no observations on difficult pas- 
sages by early critics, who would have been likely, 
from their knowledge of the language and literature of 
the period, to have cleared up many difficulties, and 
enlightened many obscurities. 

At a late period in Shakespearian criticism, after 
nearly all the harvest had been supposed to have been 
garnered, Mr. Collier, to whom all students of our early 
poetry are under lasting obligations, produces a volume 
which, without partaking exactly of the character 
whence we might more reasonably have anticipated, if 
at all, a solution of some of these difficulties, cannot but 
be regarded as a truly important addition to the sources 
of information already accessible. Mr. Collier has dis- 
covered a copy of the edition of 1632, filled with early 
MS. corrections of the text by a person evidently well 



acquainted with the author he attempts to correct, and 
worthy of the greatest consideration. We may safely 
accept these corrections as nearly contemporary with 
the work itself, for the great changes in the English 
idiom having been made before the year 1632, it is 
of little consequence whether we adopt 1632 or 1640 
as the date at which they were written. 

Presuming, then, for the sake of argument, these 
corrections were made in 1632, only sixteen years 
after the death of Shakespeare, we have at last some- 
thing tangible, some early authority to which to refer 
when a passage in the text is inexplicable. Let us 
not, however, be too^precipitate. It is well known to 
every student that in philology, as in science, there 
are systematic boundaries which, when confirmed by 
evidence and observation, must not be violated without 
the strongest proof of the cases being exceptional. 
Once let us satisfactorily ascertain the existence of a 
law, and cases of opposition to that law will have to 
be most seriously considered, and not admitted as true 
exceptions on slight testimony. Applying this canon 
to the corrections of Mr. Collier's folio, there are two 
circumstances under* which no manuscript emendation 
of so late a date as 1632 will be admissible. 

1 . It will not be admissible in any case where good 
sense can be satisfactorily made of the passage as it 
stands in the original, even although the correction 
may appear to give greater force or harmony to the 
passage. 



2. It will not be admissible in any alteration of an 
idiomatic passage, where a similar turn of language 
can be produced in any contemporary writer • and it 
must be at once rejected, if the like idiom can be dis- 
covered in other parts of the works of Shakespeare 
himself. 

With these reservations, it would be unjust not to 
acquiesce in the opinion of the value attached to 
Mr. Collier's volume ; and no one can be more anxious 
than myself for the revelation of the many important 
suggestions it in all probability contains ; but when we 
find Mr. Collier almost unhesitatingly adopting read- 
ings that merely have the merit of variation, and 
giving his immediate adhesion to others which admit 
of the greatest doubt, and deserve the profoundest 
investigation, a few observations, not implying in the 
remotest degree a depreciation of their value, but 
merely suggesting the application of a somewhat 
severer canon of judging of them before adoption, can 
scarcely, I hope, be considered either disrespectful to 
Mr. Collier, or presuming on the patience of the 
public. It is only a student who can really appreciate 
the labours of a student ; and Mr. Collier's exertions 
in this department of literature have been so arduous, 
so meritorious, and what perhaps is still better, so 
successful, it is, I feel sure, quite unnecessary to dis- 
claim any idea of controversy beyond the gentle one 
of suggesting what we imagine to be the path of 
Truth. 



9 



That the corrector of the folio of 1632 made his 
emendations conjecturally can scarcely admit of a 
doubt ; the mere alteration of guiled shore in the 
Merchant of Venice, to gulling shore, distinctly 
proving he made his correction after the grammatical 
construction which allowed the substitution of the 
passive participle for the active, had fallen into disuse. 
It would be, however, obviously unfair to test the 
value of the volume by the very few selections 
Mr. Collier has made, because these appear to have 
been purposely taken somewhat indiscriminately, and 
in the slight glance I had of it, at a meeting of the 
Council of the Shakespeare Society, I observed more 
than one of very great value, which may assist in de- 
termining the conjectures of GifFord and others. At 
present, therefore, it is proposed to limit our con- 
sideration to one correction, which has already received 
almost universal assent, but which will not, I think, 
eventually be confirmed. 

In the play of Cymbeline (Act hi, Sc. 4), Imogen, 
in the agony of her apprehensions respecting Pos- 
thumus, says, — 

" Some jay of Italy, 

Whose mother was her painting, hath betray'd him ; 
Poor I am stale, a garment out of fashion." 

The MS. corrector of the second folio, not being 
acquainted with the figurative idiomatic phraseology 



10 

in the second line, which was current under various 
forms in the dramatic literature of Shakespeare's 
period, gives a reading which is unquestionably more 
suitable to modern hearers, and, under any circum- 
stances, must be considered a verbal alteration of 
peculiar ingenuity, — 

" Some jay of Italy, 

Who smotliers her with painting, hath betray 'd him." 

It is unnecessary to observe that she refers to an 
Italian courtesan, and that the first five words of the 
second line, whichever reading we adopt, clearly mean 
that she was the creature of Painting not of Nature. 
I am prepared to show that the original reading ex- 
presses this in grammatical and forcible phraseology, 
and that it is confirmed by other passages in the works 
of Shakespeare himself. 

One little word has created any obscurity that 
might have arisen. Had the phrase run, " whose 
mother was painting," there would scarcely have been 
any commentary expected or given. The adjunct of 
her, although in strict unison with the style of 
Shakespeare, sounds at first somewhat harsh, but 
the meaning of the passage, in the absence of any 
doubt suggested by the commentators, would have 
been readily interpreted, " Some jay (or courtesan) of 
Italy, the creature of painting, hath betray 'd him." Not 
only is this kind of imagery usual, but we actually 



11 

find it introduced into the very next act of this 
same play, — 

" Clo. Thou villain base, 

Know'st me not by my clothes ? 

Crui. No, nor thy tailor, rascal, 

Who is thy grandfather ; he made those clothes, 
Wliich, as it seems, make thee." 

Act iv, Sc. 2. 



Here is precisely the same thought, and might be 
expressed in the same terms, " whose father was his 
clothing." A much stronger instance will be found 
in All's Well that Ends Well, act i, sc. 2 — 

" Let me not live, quoth he, 
After my flame lacks oil, to be the snuff 
Of younger spirits, whose apprehensive senses 
All but new things disdain ; whose judgments are 
Mere fathers of their garments ; whose constancies 
Expire before their fashions." 

Mr. Collier has a sensible remark on this passage. 
" Tyrwhitt," he says, " would read feathers for fathers ; 
but the sense of the old reading is very obvious ; the 
judgments of such persons are only employed in 
begetting new modes of dressing their persons. " 
Precisely so ; and a similar explanation will suit 
the passage in Cymbeline. If whose mother was 
her painting was, as I have heard it said, too obscure 
a phrase to be used before the " groundlings " of the 
Globe, surely mere fathers of their garments is open 



12 

to the same objection.*" Singularly enough, the elder 
critics proposed feather in the place of mother, as 
Tyrwhitt suggested it in the other play for father. 
I am persuaded no alteration is tenable in either 
instance. 

It must be recollected the metaphorical use of 
father, mother, and parent, is of very frequent occur- 
rence in the old dramatists. Thus, in Shakespeare, 
we have the following instances besides those already 
quoted, — 

" Thou still hast been the father of good news." 

Hamlet, Act ii, Sc. 2. 
" What news, lord Bardolph ? every minute now 
Should be the father of some stratagem." 

2 Henry IV, Act i, Sc. 1. 

The use of the word here only bears a distant 
analogy to that in the passage in Cymbeline, but 
combined with the circumstance that Shakespeare 
elsewhere represents the dress as a man's father, can 
we refuse to accept the probability of his regarding 
the courtesan's painting as her mother, — the courtesan, 
in fact, created by painting ? The imagery is surely 
not more forced with painting than with clothing. 
If a man's dress can be metaphorically called his 
father, a courtesan's painting can, with equal pro- 

* Steevens quotes the following important parallel passage from an old 
play, "a parcel of conceited feather-caps, whose fathers were their garments ." 
I should feel much obliged by a reference to the play from which it was taken, 
Steevens having mislaid his note of the particular drama. 



13 

priety, be called her mother; and it must also be 
noticed that Imogen continues the imagery in the next 
line, calling herself, " a garment out of fashion." If 
the passages directly bearing on this subject be placed 
in juxtaposition, the reader will, perhaps, more dis- 
tinctly perceive the great force of the line of argument 
we have pursued, — 

" Some jay of Italy, 

Whose mother was her painting, hath betray 'd him ; 
Poor I am stale, a garment out of fashion." 

?, Act iii, Sc. 4. 



" Clo. Thou villain base, 

Know'st me not by my clothes ? 

Gid. No, nor thy tailor, rascal, 

Who is thy grandfather ; he made those clothes, 
Which, as it seems, make thee." 

Act iv, Sc. 2. 



(Compare King Lear, Act ii, Sc. 2.) 

" Let me not live, quoth he, 
After my flame lacks oil, to be the snuff 
Of younger spirits, whose apprehensive senses 
All but new things disdain; whose judgments are 
Mere fathers of their garments ; whose constancies 
Expire before their fashions." 

AW 8 Well that Ends Well, Act i, Sc. 2. 

" A parcel of conceited feather-caps, whose fathers were 
their garments." — Old Play, cited, without reference, by Steevens. 

There can be little doubt but that a careful exami- 
nation of our old plays would enable us to quote other 



14 

passages of similar import, but what is here produced 
will, it is thought, be sufficient to prove that it was 
not unusual to refer to the external adornment of the 
person figuratively as the parent, especially in cases 
where that adornment was a prominent feature. This 
admitted, it must unquestionably be unsafe to receive 
the correctness of any emendation of the first passage 
quoted from Cymbeline, unless it were clearly 
supported by good and contemporary authority, such 
as an early quarto, or a MS. correction, the source of 
which could be clearly traced to Shakespeare's time. 
Mr. Collier asserts the emendation of his folio must 
u instantly carry acquiescence with it." No conjectural 
alterations can be so received. The more plausible 
they are, the greater is the necessity of examining 
them more earnestly, so that our judgment be not 
diverted from what is, in all cases of Shakespearian 
criticism, the absolute necessity of ascertaining whether 
or no we are departing from the phraseology of the 
poet and his contemporaries. No sophistry can long 
conceal the importance of an attention to this, before 
giving our adhesion to violent changes, even in a case, 
as in the present one, where the alteration is so ex- 
ceedingly clever, that, had it occurred to a modern 
critic, he would undoubtedly have enjoyed the conven- 
tional title of 'ingenious' ever afterwards. In the 
words of Johnson, applied to another critical effort, it 
might have been styled a noble emendation, placing 
" the critic on a level with the author." But inquirers 



15 

in this branch of literature must have observed how 
fallacious are all conjectural readings ; how the dis- 
covery of a really ancient text of authority will dissi- 
pate pages of critical ingenuity and learning ; and 
although a hint at the possibility of " Smothers her 
with painting," being capable of question, has at 
present been impatiently listened to, we may still 
venture to hope that what has been here advanced 
will cause a little examination to be given to the sub- 
ject, before it be decided that the old reading shall be 
displaced by the new. 



Avenue Lodge, Brixton Hill 
March, 1852. 



tucker, printer, frith street, SOIIO. 



publications illustrative of Sfjaftegpeare's Me & OTritmgs, 

On Sale by JOHN EUSSELL SMITH, 36, Soho Square. 



Malone's Letter to Dr. Farmer (in Reply to Ritso?i), relative to his Edition of 

Shakespeare, published in 1790. 8vo, sewed. Is. 1792 

Ireland's (W. H.) Miscellaneous Papers and Legal Instruments, from the original 

MSS. (the Shakespeare Forgeries). 8vo, plate. 2s. 6d. 1796 

Ireland's (Sam.) Vindication of his Conduct respecting the Publication of the supposed 

Shakespeare MSS., in reply to the Critical Labours of Mr. Malone. 8vo, Is. 6d. 1796 

Ireland's Investigation of Mr.Malone's Claim to the Character of Scholar or Critic, being 

an Examination of bis "Inquiry into the Authenticity of the Shakespeare Manuscripts." 8vo, Is. 6d. 1796 
Ireland's (W. Henry) Authentic Account of the Shakesperian Manuscripts, &c. 

(respecting his fabrication of them). 8vo, Is. &d. 1796 

Comparative Review of the Opinions of Jas. Boaden, in 1795, and in 1796, relative to 

the Shakespeare MSS. 8vo. 2*. 1796 

Graves's (H. M.) Essay on the Genius of Shakespeare, with Critical Remarks on the 

Characters of Romeo, Hamlet, Juliet, and Ophelia. Post 8vo, cloth. 2s. 6</. (pub. at 5s. 6d.) 1826 

Wivell's Historical Account of the Monumental Bust of Shakespeare, in the Chancel 

of Stratford-on-Avon Church. 8vo. Opiates. Is. 6d. 1827 

Ireland's (W. H.) Vortigern, an Historical Play, represented at Drury Lane, April 2, 

1796, as a supposed newly discovered Drama of Shakespeare, a new Edition, with an original Preface. 

8vo, facsimile, Is. 6d. (pub. at 3*. 6d.) 1832 

The Preface is both interesting and curious, from the additional information it gives respecting 
the Shakespeare Forgeries, containing also the substance of his " Confessions." 

Boaden (Jas.) on the Sonnets of Shakespeare, identifying the person to whom they are 

addressed, and elucidating several points in the Poet's History. 8vo, Is. 6d. 1837 

Traditionary Anecdotes of Shakespeare, collected in Warwickshire in 1693. 8vo, 

sewed. Is. 1838 

Madden's (Sir F.) Observations on an Autograph of Shakespeare and the Orthography 

of his Name. 8vo, sewed. Is. 1838 

HaUiwell's ShaJcesperiana. — A Catalogue of the Early Editions of Shakespeare's Plays, 

and of the Commentaries and other Publications illustrative of his Works. 8vo, cloth. 3s. 1841 

Indispensable to Collectors of Shakesperiana. 

Halliwell's Introduction to " Midsummer Night's Dream." 8vo, cloth. 3s. 1841 

Halliwell on the Character of Ealstaff. 12mo, cloth. 2s. 6d. 1841 

Collier's (J. P.) Reasons for a New Edition of Shakespeare's Works. 8vo, Is. 1842 

Shakespeare's Library. — A Collection of the Romances, Novels, Poems, and Histories, 

used by Shakespeare as the foundation of his Dramas, now first collected and accurately reprinted from 
the original Editions, with Notes, &c, by J. P. Collier. 2 vols. 8vo, cloth. 10s. 6d. (pub. at £1. Is.) 1843 
Account of the only known Manuscript of Shakespeare's Plays, comprising some im- 
portant variations and corrections in the " Merry Wives of Windsor," obtained from a Playhouse copy 
of that Play recently discovered. By J. 0. Halliwell. 8vo, Is. 1843 

Dyce's Remarks on Collier's and Knight's Editions of Shakespeare. 8vo, cloth. 4s. 6d. 1844 
Rhnbault's Who was "Jack Wilson," the Singer of Shakespeare's Stage ? An attempt 
to prove the identity of this person with John Wilson, Doctor of Music in the University of Oxford, 
A. d. 1644. 8vo, Is. 1846 

Halliwell's New Life of Shakespeare, including many Particulars respecting the Poet 
and his Family, never before published. A handsome vol. Svo,*^ engravings by Fairholt, cloth, lbs. 1848 
This work contains upwards of forty documents respecting Shakespeare and his Faniily, never 
before published, besides numerous others, indirectly illustrating the Poet's Biography. All 
the Anecdotes and Traditions concerning Shakespeare are here for the first time collected, 
and much new light is thrown on his personal history, by papers exhibiting him as selling 
Malt and Stone, &c. Of the seventy-six engravings* which illustrate the volume, more than 
fifty have never before been published. 
A New Boke about Shakespeare and Stratford-on-Avon. By J. O. HalliwelL F.R.S., &c. 
4to, curious cuts and facsimiles, only 50 copies privately printed, cloth. \hs. 1850 

This volume contains several curious, hitherto inedited, documents relating to Shakespeare and 
his Family, with facsimiles of the Poet's Marriage-bond with Anne Hathaway, &c. But 
what will render it of great interest to American readers, are Illustrations and Notes to 
Washington Irving's celebrated paper on Stratford-on-Avon. The illustrations include Views 
of the Red Horse Inn, the " little parlour " in which Mr. Irving took up his abode, the 
Jubilee Amphitheatre, the Boom in which Shakespeare was born, and the Shop and Boom at 
the birthplace ; Clarlecote, the Clerk's Dwelling, Exterior and Interior ; Shakespeare s 
Matchlock, Hamlet's Sword, the Friar's Lantern, the Keeper's Lodge at Charlecote, and 
other scenes mentioned by living. 
Shakespeare's Will, copied from the Original in the Prerogative Court, preserving the 
Interlineations and Facsimdes of the three Autographs of the Poet, with a few preliminary Observations, 
by J. 0. Halliwell. 4to, Is. l ^ 1 



